Alabama

Editorial: A new tenure law, yet again

Republicans and Democrats alike in the Alabama Legislature probably would agree the teacher tenure bill that was signed into law by Gov. Robert Bentley Thursday will make it a lot easier for superintendents and school boards to fire teachers and other school employees.

And to many people, the change is long overdue because arbitrators seemed to err in favor of employees who remained on the public payroll for months until their cases played out.

But some would argue that the new law makes it too easy for superintendents and school boards to get rid of teachers and other employees, good or bad.

Under the former tenure law, dismissed teachers appealed to federal arbitrators. The law's critics said it took far too long to remove bad teachers and also pointed to cases where arbitrators failed to uphold school board decisions to fire teachers and other employees over egregious behavior.

That gave groups like the Alabama Association of School Boards, the A+ Education Partnership and the Business Council of Alabama potent arguments for repeal of the old law. Not that Republicans, who control the Legislature with super-majority margins in both houses, needed any encouragement to take on their chief antagonist after the Democratic Party.

The Alabama Education Association, which fought repeal of the arbitration law, says the new law will make it too easy for school boards to fire employees for personal or political reasons.

The Legislature rewrote the tenure law in 2004 to try to streamline cumbersome dismissal and appeal procedures for school employees. Critics said the law before 2004 discouraged school administrators from trying to remove bad teachers from the classroom. That didn't seem to change much, if at all, under the arbitration law.

Before 2004, a school board accepted or rejected a superintendent's recommendation for dismissal. A dismissed teacher could appeal to the board, which would decide after a hearing whether it had made the right decision in the first place. A teacher could appeal a dismissal vote to the state Tenure Commission and then to the courts.

The newest law sets up a system of retired circuit judges to hear teacher appeals. That sounds fine. But this part about the hearing officer's duty is disconcerting: "Deference is given to the decision of the employer."

Why should an employee bother to appeal if the law tells the judge to lean in favor of the school board? That just might be what some supporters of the new law want. So much for the idea of fairness. And AEA is certain to try to get the courts to strike that sentence out of the law.

Another part of the law says a school board doesn't have to hold any hearings for employees laid off in a reduction in force because of financial problems. Conceivably, a school board could invent a financial crisis to justify firing teachers and support workers who would have no way to appeal.

Still, school boards need a workable way to remove problem teachers and employees. Perhaps that's what the state will get after the courts take out any missteps in its third tenure law in seven years.

By Mike Hollis, for the editorial board. Email: mike.hollis@htimes.com